Give parents the right to veto teachers' strikes to limit disruption in
schools, says Education Select Committee member Chris Skidmore.

This week, just a few months after joint strike action from the NUT and the NASUWT in the North West, yet more strike action is planned, this time on an even wider scale.

The education revolution which these unions object to has already done a great deal to empower parents, giving them real choice and, through free schools, the opportunity to get involved in their local education system.

With thousands of children and parents facing yet more disruption it’s high time we extended parent power a little further and give them a say on strikes.

Of course you could object to such a proposal if you thought teachers’ and parents’ interests stand permanently opposed, but that’s far from true.

Parents want what’s best for their children, and this means a high-status teaching profession where excellence is rewarded. Parents only agenda is to make sure that schools are as good as they can be, making them uniquely well placed to judge whether the disruption of strikes is in the best interests of teachers and children.

Take one of the key objections of the unions, the introduction of performance-related pay. A recent poll found 61 per cent of parents support this.

They can see that far from damaging the profession this would address the unfairness of the current system where length of service counts for substantially more than effectiveness, demoralising the exceptional but young teachers we want to keep in schools.

The truth is that industrial action is being pushed forward by the hard-left core at the heart of these enormous unions, not by teachers themselves.

Look closely at the NUT executive for instance and you’ll find that more than half are linked to organisations like the Socialist Party and the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty; three have previously stood as Labour Party candidates.

These are people with a political axe to grind, and they won’t let a lack of support from the nine out of ten teachers they represent prevent them from doing all they can to frustrate reform and embarrass the Government.

While press releases from both unions have claimed 80 per cent support strike action this is a very partial picture.

Reflecting the sheer indifference teachers have for their unions, which many feel compelled to join in order to get insurance, turnout was low. Factoring this in just 33 per cent of members balloted by the NASUWT gave their support, at the NUT just 22 per cent did.

Not only have the unions only managed to muster a small minority in support, it’s also been a year since members were balloted. Any claims that these strikes, planned for October, are democratically mandated are, to put it charitably, extremely thin.

Acting out of political loathing, with barely any democratic mandate, these unions are proving a menace to our children’s education.

We must finally say enough is enough, and restrain these unions from unnecessary and harmful action.

That restraint needs to come from somewhere non-partisan, with the best interests of schools and pupils at heart, and parents fit the description perfectly.

Balloting should be done on a school-by-school basis. If a union is calling on their members from a school to strike then the parents of every pupil there should have the chance to weigh up the disruption against the claimed justifications.

If parents support action then it can go ahead.

Such a ballot would recognise that, while all decisions to strike are significant, teacher strikes can be particularly harmful, and so should only be done when necessary.

Giving parents the chance to say no would eliminate the petty politics which drives the militant elements of some teaching unions to push needless action to their members.

Strikes should only happen when they’re good for schools and children; parents, not unions, are the people whose judgement we should trust on this.

*Chris Skidmore is the Conservative MP for Kingswood and member of the Education Select Committee